[Rick Masters]

Ever notice how much better a thermal pilot you become low over hostile terrain?

[reluctantsparrow]

Ever notice how much better a thermal pilot you become low over hostile terrain?

Im one of em Rick, took off from chelan butte once, sinking like a rock, flew through a few thermals and just kept flying towards the deck,.......My buddy Kamron and another pilot...Sarah was her name, unknown to me, were watching the whole thing....After I flew right through a couple of good thermals Sarah turns to kamron and asks Kamron,.. why doesnt Jim TURN?
Kamron was unconcerned, he told Sarah to keep watching, Kamron told Sarah that I was a CRISIS pilot then explained, ....jim does not start flying well until he HAS to....keep watching.
Sarah kept watching as I caught a weak one two hundred feet off the deck and thermalled out to do very well that day....yep...guilty as charged. I am a crisis pilot. I have no idea why but this absurd personality trait of mine has been observed by several pilots on several occasions and relayed back to me. I really did not even notice it for myself, it had to be pointed out to me, but Its just the way I roll.
Oh yeah Rick, we set up a cross country challenge where we both have to stay within 1000 feet of the deck during the entire flight?...im your guy. (the guy with big wheels)

[Rick Masters]

I cheat.    

One afternoon I left Mazourka with 12,000 MSL and reached the Inyos only to discover the easterlies flowing downslope. I flew out into the valley but found no lift. Two miles from my motorcycle, I was down to 300 feet. Not wishing to walk, I concentrated on the Snooper's occasional beeping to circle in warmer areas of ground heat. Although my variometer was indicating nothing but zero sink, after a series of 360s I would find myself 30 feet or so higher. Gaining what little I could, I would head north and repeat the turns the next time the Snooper "beeped." I lost 200 feet during the first mile and completed the second with only 100. After landing, I got a funny feeling that I could have kept going indefinitely at 100 feet! I have always admired the exceptional hang glider pilots who could do this kind of thing but I had never been particularly good at it. Now the Snooper was making it almost easy.
-- "Explorations with the Thermal Snooper" by Rick Masters, Soaring Magazine - The Journal of the Soaring Society of America, August 1987, pp. 24-29
https://web.archive.org/web/20110902024918/http://www.cometclones.com/illusion.htm

[reluctantsparrow]

Love it! Been reading more about the snooper Rick. Never used one. Got to get me one of those.

[reluctantsparrow]

Big, oversized wheels have another advantage I discovered. The worlds were held at chelan once. i was not competing but was asked to be a wind Dummy along with Bill Averret, who has since passed on but was undoubtedly the top landing king of Chelan Butte at that time. Bill and I said sure, why not? So we take off early to spot lift and soon the pack follows us into the sky as the lift is quite good. I did not know most of the visiting pilots and they did not know me. All they saw was a single surface glider with really big wheels.....and....instead of thermalling aggressivly up past me in those high performance wings they ALL gave me a wide berth as they assumed I was a total newbie. It was hilarious. Here I was on top of a stack of forty gliders below me and no one wanted to get close to the single surface wing with Big wheels....LOVED it! Next time, if there is a next time, I would add a streamer to my kingpost as well.

[reluctantsparrow]

to stay in the harness long enough to do a range of motion rigging adjustment test with the front restraint R&D.
I still hope to do this test and use the GoPro so others can offer up suggestions.

Had some time today to rig up the ARPR today to check for range of motion.
Range of motion is okay if you are going to flare from only the basetube.
The Rocking up action required to perform safe flares from the downtubes required far too much slack added to the restraint line to provide any protection at all.
I ran the restraint from one corner of the upright/basetube junction, over the midsection of the pilot (since that is the only place on the harness I am using that offers loops), and over to the other upright/basetube corner. I then lengthened the restraint line until I could perform full push out in the rocked up position.
so much slack was needed that i could stand up,walk forward, and bump my head into the keel of the glider at the flying speed angle of attack.
I know this is not the perfect configuration ARP outlined but it was close and modified only to do a quick check of range of motion. the problem is created by the slack needed to rock up and push out.....where a rear restraint line does not pose this problem.
Not saying it wont work....just saying the way I rigged it up wont work.

[Bill Cummings]

to stay in the harness long enough to do a range of motion rigging adjustment test with the front restraint R&D.
I still hope to do this test and use the GoPro so others can offer up suggestions.

Had some time today to rig up the ARPR today to check for range of motion.
Range of motion is okay if you are going to flare from only the basetube.
The Rocking up action required to perform safe flares from the downtubes required far too much slack added to the restraint line to provide any protection at all.
I ran the restraint from one corner of the upright/basetube junction, over the midsection of the pilot (since that is the only place on the harness I am using that offers loops), and over to the other upright/basetube corner. I then lengthened the restraint line until I could perform full push out in the rocked up position.
so much slack was needed that i could stand up,walk forward, and bump my head into the keel of the glider at the flying speed angle of attack.
I know this is not the perfect configuration ARP outlined but it was close and modified only to do a quick check of range of motion. the problem is created by the slack needed to rock up and push out.....where a rear restraint line does not pose this problem.
Not saying it wont work....just saying the way I rigged it up wont work.

Good description Jim.
Next thing I can think of to try is to use the connection point near the crotch of my harness that I use to Skyting tow.

The problem I can imagine though is also at full flare from a vertical position would also require too much slack otherwise there would be no reason to let go of the base tube to flare from the down tubes. The base tube will be beyond arms length.

Just at the limit of arms length from the base tube is when we would want the ARPR to come into play during a nose in. My arms are not long enough to stand up and launch while holding the base tube. However I have seen pilots do this during high wind foot launches but what about the landing? Some flare capability would be restricted.

I DO SEE AN APPLICATION, WHILE TOWING, FOR A GLIDER EQUIPPED WITH WHEELS THAT STAYS WITH THE GLIDER AND WHEN LANDING USING A RUNWAY. (Where there is no need to go vertical for landing.)

[reluctantsparrow]

Just did a test of my bermuda triangle line system with a short section of bungee in the system. I am amazed how much forward and upward travel the triangle system allowed even though it was attached at the exact same point on the wires as bar was during the bungee/leash/attached to the keel/ set up where the leash runs under the bar.
Might have been the wire attachment on flexing wires that allowed so much travel? hmmm, have to slow mo it some more...but..
So far, I think the bar idea I tested last time looks the most promising but it might have been a fluke.....
going to Rig up the Bar again, as that has produced the best result and re-test until I know its not a fluke.

[reluctantsparrow]

Did a test going back to the Bar/leash/bungee system to make sure the first....success...was not a fluke due to bad pulleys, slow speed, etc.
Sorry to say this test did not show good results. In slow mo the pilots head still makes contact with the keel/nose area of the glider. I will repeat this same test a few times but if the results are the same I will not keep posting vids. Sorry for the bad news.
the only difference between this test and the first bar/bungee/leash tests was I have more speed on this test and I wrapped the bungee once around the mains to reduce stretch, but with the increased speed the stretch was considerable.
it is not so much the amount of stretch that is the problem.
The problem is the trajectory the pilots body is on.


sure looks like a ...fail...to me unless you guys can see something different....going to go back out and test it one more time to make sure....

[Bill Cummings]

Just did a test of my bermuda triangle line system with a short section of bungee in the system. I am amazed how much forward and upward travel the triangle system allowed even though it was attached at the exact same point on the wires as bar was during the bungee/leash/attached to the keel/ set up where the leash runs under the bar.
Might have been the wire attachment on flexing wires that allowed so much travel? hmmm, have to slow mo it some more...but..
So far, I think the bar idea I tested last time looks the most promising but it might have been a fluke.....
going to Rig up the Bar again, as that has produced the best result and re-test until I know its not a fluke.

Viewers should click on the print on the upper left of the embedded youtube screen to take you directly to YouTube.
There you can click on the gear symbol on the bottom right of the Youtube screen to select slow motion of either half speed or one quarter speed.
also in the bottom right of the Youtube screen you can click the bottom right hand box to give you full screen.
Que it up at 4:10 to watch the action.
Things that I'm seeing are:
The rear of the keel is coming in contact with the zip line. (Impeding the nose over)
The rear zip line pulley is going slack.
The front zip line pulley is under tension stopping the nose plate three feet above of the ground. (Impeding the nose over.)
These are not faults that I'm finding with the crash simulation but observations to consider for the desired end solution.
Things to consider - is the nose plate going to be on the ground before the helmet comes in contact with the keel?
Or will the keel be moving downward as the helmet meets the keel? (Which scenario would be least desirable?)
Should or could the Bermuda Triangle be rigged to pull the pilots head out of line with the keel?
While typing I see Jim put up a second Youtube post so I hope my post is still helpful.
How about a rear bungee with a rope limiter since a head and neck injury may be among the worst events?